Friday, 23 December 2011

Tim Minchin wrote a song which was recorded and scheduled to be aired on 23 December. But for some funny reason it was axed from the show. Apparently it took the Mickey out of Woody Allen and lizards. You can read more about it on the MailOnline website. But it is definitely worth a view and here it is for your personal delight...

I saw one of my comments with a url like:www.blur -blur.com/pagename.html#lf_comment=9683676

So I was wondering: if you wanted to give each comment ever posted on the internet by a human a unique identifier how long would the url have to be?

I like to make sure I encompass every reasonable possibility and I wondered how many humans had ever lived. According to the Population Reference Bureaux the rather whimsical calculation results in the figure 107,602,707,791.

So there have been about one hundred thousand million so far. If every one of them lived for 80 years and left a message every second of their lives (a task that is highly improbable - like impossible) how many messages would there be so far?

One person would leave 60 messages per minute and 60 times that every hour which is 3,600. Multiply that by 24 to get the number of messages per day and it comes to 86,400. Multiply that by 365.25 to get the number of messages per year (the .25 accounts for leap years) and you get 316,677,600 messages by one person per year. Multiply that by 80 to get how many messages each person leaves in their life time and it comes to 25,334,208,000. That's twenty five thousand million messages per person and there have been 107,602,707,791 people. So multiply those two figures together and you get the total number of messages left by this hypothetical hyperactive human race. It comes to the not so staggering 2,726,029,380,540,414,528,000 which is 22 digits long.

If you used alphanumeric characters (that is a to zand0 to 9) you could represent it with 15 characters. Just 15 individual characters to uniquely identify every message in that hypothetical population.

Thursday, 22 December 2011

In the House of Commons the issue of giving disabled children an advantage in exams was raised. To give a simple example: a dyslexic person may be given 25% extra time to complete an exam. That all seems very reasonable on the surface. But I am shocked. I am shocked that these people, apparently clear headed thoughtful rational people, are discussing this issue and assuming it makes sense. But it doesn't.

Underlying the discussion are certain assumptions that block out reality. Of course it seems nice and equitable for a benevolent society to give support to disadvantaged people. If we assume the system is fair in the first place it makes sense that someone who takes longer to read the questions and who finds it harder to actually write the answer than the "average" child should be given a more level playing field.

But consider this for a moment. Dyslexic children are subnormal dunces. They are lazy and deserve what they get. It's a sort of Darwinian "survival of the fittest" thing. I don't want to get into a moral discussion because looking after disabled people is an affront to the very process of the evolution of a fit, healthy and happy society. By looking after disabled people and the old and infirm we are wasting resources and damaging the long term survival of the human race.

Does that sound a little eugenic? The science of eugenics originated at the beginning of the 20th century and has always been controversial. The Nazis made it politically undesirable using it as justification for their policies of racial hygiene.

The point is that the whole education system and the actual practical purpose of the schooling system and the exam system is precisely to give moral justification to a few people having significant advantage over the rest of the population. If you need to give people you perceive as being subnormal in some way (of course through no fault of their own) an advantage who are you actually serving? Not them. You are maintaining a false perception that some humans are naturally superior to others and that entitles them to social advantage. It doesn't. If you actually apply the assumed morals then people with natural advantage should work harder for society with equal benefits and facility to survive. The morality is that if one person naturally has twice the energy of another then they should do twice the work for the same return. But our culture has this on its head. The consequence (revealed in a recent poll) is that 55% of the English population consider that poor people deserve what they get because they are lazy. This is so immoral that it beggars belief.

It is one thing to believe that being better (physically or mentally) gives one a natural advantage but to wrap the justification for abuse in a tissue of moral claptrap is a heinous duplicity and perhaps one of the worst human crimes.

Making yourself feel benign for your own satisfaction by giving a patronizing advantage to people you perceive as less fortunate is also very anti-Christian. It is part of the cancerous self consumption that is devouring and destroying this culture.

The answer is to provide an education which encompasses all the varied talents that humans exhibit. Rarely, if ever, is there a human who does not "deserve" to live from the outset. The exam system, if such a thing should exist at all, should find the talents that exist not define them and class people on a hierarchical scale.

Say I naturally like driving. I am good at it. If there is someone who doesn't like driving much it makes sense that I should do the driving. I get to enjoy it. But the person in the passenger seat is not me. If I were in the passenger seat I would be less happy. But the passenger is a more intellectual person and loves map reading. They get to enjoy themselves doing the map reading. I wouldn't enjoy that. They wouldn't enjoy driving. So the right people are doing the right things and the system works well. If, however, you judge the situation from the assumed position of a driver and that 'driving' was more 'valuable' than map reading you might be tempted to award more privilege to 'drivers'. The consequence would be that drivers get rewarded more than map-readers. This becomes ridiculous when you consider that the drivers are now getting disproportionate advantage because they love driving AND get paid more. This can (and does) lead to a lot of miserable and resentful map-readers. It also leads to mixed motives and aspirations. People who are naturally good at map reading forgo their natural talents and try to do well at 'driving' for the privileges it affords them. What you get is manipulative competition and a whole lot of crap drivers. This may all sound a little topsy-turvy but that is the ridiculous nature of our culture.

Bankers do not really 'deserve' the advantages they get. The only reason people accept the way things are is because they feel they are disadvantaged and their only hope is to conform and maybe they will win. Humanity has simply got to stop this perverted crap. Humanity, you and me, have got to stop supporting the 'benign' oppressive paradigms of our culture.

The "Occupy" movement is fundamentally about this; Even if a lot of people involved can't quite get it sorted in their heads. We cannot carry on with the escalating inequality because it is destroying life and the planet. We have to get away from this primitive judgemental attitude.

Monday, 19 December 2011

Or was that Kim Jong Il is dead? Anyway some North Korean monkey apparently died and all the people in the country are crying. Thousands of them are all lined up crying and wailing because their dear leader is dead. It is a pitiful sight. It is the human race at its most insane. Well not quite - but pretty insane. It is a tragic example of the effects of a benign dictator. They all think they need him because he made them entirely dependent upon him. The only way to do that is to have a lot of people suffer and the rest benefit so that they dare not dissent. What a horrid bunch these humans can be. There is not a lot to say really. Any sane human can see the pure lunacy of it. I think Harry Potter should be made compulsory viewing in North Korea.

So in memory of all the people that have died at his miserable hands I have made this beautiful picture of Kum Jill Jong or whatever his memorable name is.

Anyway I am tired and have to go to bed whilst millions of people in North Korea die in pain. Yawn... night night.

Now if anyone is interested the best selling items on Amazon UK today are:

I can't really review The Inbetweeners Movie because I haven't seen it or even heard of it. Just goes to show how well connected I am. The IMDb (Internet Movie Database) has it rated at 7.5 out of 10. So that's not so hot. It is all about four socially troubled 18 year olds (Will, Simon, Jay and Neil) from the south of England going to Malia (a small town on the north coast of Crete (that's Greece for those who didn't know (and it's very warm and beautiful))) on holiday. It seems to be a totally slapstick farce and not worth the toxic material it is cut on.

Now Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 I can recommend because I have seen it. Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows (part 2) has a rating of 8.2 on the IMDb and, given the respect I have for the voters' views on the IMDb, I guess it is a reasonable rating except for the fact that The Inbetweeners Movie has a rating of 7.5 which is exactly 1.9 higher than it should be at 5.6. So those 1.9 should go to Harry Potter which would give it a rating of 10.1 which is a little over the odds but it'll do. Good old Voldemort split himself into Horcruxes to extend his living spacetime and Harry, Ron and Hermione (pronounced her-my-on-eeeeee not herm-e-own) are on a desperate quest to locate and destroy all the horcruxes in an attempt to kill "He who shall not be named" Lord whatsisface. It is the eighth and final film in the Harry Potter film series. So you'll just have to go watch the other seven first if you haven't seen them.

Then there is the complete series of Frozen Planet which is a very beautiful nature documentary series made (partly) by the BBC and featuring David Attenborough as the narrator. In his inimitable way David makes this a profound and awesome production and it is generally very highly rated by critics - except for the scandalous bit about the polar bear. It has an unusual and quite amazing rating on the IMDb of 9.5 so this can be seriously recommend.

Harry Potter - The Complete 8-Film Collection is a must for anyone to have in their movie collection. A mega film series of a mega book series by a mega novelist. And, in my humble opinion, a brilliant insight into the utter lunacy of Christianity and the monstrous control freaks who run it and think they are so self-important to the point of elevating themselves to spiritual beings in the Universe doing God's will - Oops I'm getting carried away. But the series is brilliant by any measure. The collection contains the eight films; Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (rated 7.2 on IMDb), Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (7.2), Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (7.7), Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (7.5), Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (7.3), Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (7.3), Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 (7.6) and finally Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (8.2). Together the IMDb ratings are from 1,162,350 viewers so that is quite a lot of people and the average rating for the series comes out at 7.5. Total run time about 18 hours 49 minutes. That is serious value for money. Go buy it now!

Finally there is Bridesmaids. Lowest rating on IMDb at 7.0 so I am not going to comment on that!

Saturday, 17 December 2011

"Someone chuck me a dead man on a stick. I can do this better than the Archbishop of Canterbury. Just call me Pope David."

It appears David "Baboon" Cameroon has really lost the plot and decided to give the Archbishop of Canterbury a few lessons in theology. He declared Britain a "Christian Cunt Tree" and implied that Dr Rowan Williams was a wishy-washy liberal toot by "sympathising" with rioters and criticising the government for ripping off the poor.

In a speech on Friday 15 December 2011 David Cameron blamed the Archbishop for failing to "stand up and defend" the morals taught by the Bible. David is as likely to have read the bible as he is to have read the Conservative manifesto. His policies are directly contrary to that manifesto and his ideas of morality are based as much on the bible as Sharia law is based on Buddhism.

David Cameron is way out of his depth and is beginning to sound more like a wishy-washy Hitler every day. He also accused the Archbishop of "fuelling" terrorism and went on to say "... just as it is legitimate for religious leaders to make political comments, he [the Archbishop] shouldn’t be surprised when I respond."

He went on to say "The Bible has helped to give Britain a set of values and morals which make Britain what it is today. Values and morals we should actively stand up and defend." Er... like ripping off the poor and kowtowing to the bankers David? Ooooh good morals. I remember reading that bit in the bible... or was it Mein Kampf?

What does David Cameron know of moral codes and values? For him the moral of his story is "Lie through your teeth, become Prime Minister and get fcuking rich." and values are how to rip people off with BOGOF offers in Tesco.

And why is the Japanese government subsidising the whale hunt for about 1000 minke whales for meat this year. Why are they paying a possible £20 million from the earthquake recovery fund for security to defend themselves against environmentalists like Sea Shepherd? Why are they subsidising the hunt to the tune of £4 million every year anyway? Why, when they have a stockpile of whale meat, are they paying all this money to catch 1000 more whales. They don't seem to be doing any scientific research which is the only legal reason for killing whales. What on earth are they up to? This year it is estimated that the Japanese tax payer is contributing about £24,000 per whale caught. Is there some corruption behind the scenes?

But the Japanese whaling industry is on its last legs. Whaling has become less economically viable recently and it seems as if they just do it to prove a point. It seems unlikely it will continue for many years apart from the fact that they are killing all the whales. Most Japanese folk are quite nice. Like in most countries the population are a decent bunch. But those pretentious kowtowing hypocritical low-bowing politicians are a bunch of deceitful self-interested vicious gits. There I go getting mad again. But they are such horrible liars. They go in front of the press and say all sorts of words that sound as if they give a damn. But they really don't. People in power are so unbelievably treacherous.

If people in power are so dreadful that leaves us with a problem I guess. It seems anarchy is the only way. But whales are pretty anarchistic and look what happens to them.

Wednesday, 14 December 2011

Yet another apparently insane mass murder. Just after midday on 13 December 2011, and quite suddenly in the bustling Christmas market in Liege in Belgium, there was a series of explosions. A rogue killer by the name of Nordine Amrani had simply decided to throw multiple grenades into a crowded shopping area and to start shooting indiscriminately. Over one hundred people were seriously injured and at least six killed.

Why?

Many people will have many opinions and most people will find this a frightening and very upsetting event. Most people will look to the individual and on discovering that he was a convicted criminal and a hoarder of small arms will put it down to a crazy and rather nasty individual. On discovering that he had earlier lured a cleaning woman into his house and killed her they may conclude that this man was possibly insane, definitely horrible and it is a jolly good thing that he's dead. They will also feel that there needs to be more security and more police and that the laws and punishments should be increased in scope and severity.

But it is also a fact that this human being was a product of a culture.

There is no doubt that people affected by his aberrant behaviour are seriously injured emotionally and some physically. There has been a lot of damage caused to a lot of humans. But why does one human end up doing something like this?

It seems to be an inevitable consequence of our rather selfish, consumer based, capitalistic, blame orientated, competitive and punitive culture. We can be a rather unpleasant bunch of humans sometimes. Individuals who are disadvantaged and consequently suffer humiliation, abuse and prejudice find they have nowhere to turn. People claim that lots of people suffer hardship and even abuse but this is no excuse. They also comment that most people who suffer injustice do not resort to this kind of behaviour. This line of thinking seems only to be attempting to 'justify' the judgemental attitude towards an individual. But the judgemental attitude doesn't help in understanding or preventing this sort of thing.

Appalling though this shooting is there needs to be more effort in our culture to accommodate all people. As the austerity measures escalate in this collapsing culture and impending financial crisis the people at the bottom of the pile are suffering more and more. If there are already some who see no other way forward than to kill indiscriminately I am afraid we will see more and more of this in the next few years.

The tricky thing is that it is not simply down to the law makers or the people in authority who try to do their best to prevent this kind of mayhem. Much as I dislike police in principle there were some incredibly brave and selfless police officers who were willing to run straight into danger in Liege to attempt to stop the killing. A very significant part of changing our culture is the attitudes of all of us. When children fall out and argue or fight in school they should not be treated as if "wrong" or "bad" they should be accommodated. Intervene to stop the damage but find out why the children felt aggrieved. Give all parties full respect. It seems that very often a "shooter" has suffered from ostracism and exclusion. It seems a common factor in many apparently insane and indiscriminate killings that the perpetrator feels they are 'outside' of the culture. Their very act of attacking 'people' in the culture seems to indicate that it was not their choice and that it was forced upon them and they resent it.

By all means dislike or even hate the guy. But don't forget we are still manufacturing them in our schools.

And by the way - austerity measures should start at the TOP not at the bottom. It simply makes sense.